Friday, 14 December 2007

Is the Public Better at Spending Lottery Money Than Expert Panels?


The news that 42% of voting TV viewers supported the Sustrans Connect2 project in its competition for £50m from the National Lottery with the other 3 short-listed schemes from the Eden Project, the Black Country Urban Park and Sherwood Forest appears to be of great significance (http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2007/dec/13/cyclingholidays.nationallottery). We are constantly being told by a hostile media that some lottery money is wasted but it seems, at first sight, that the public have made an excellent choice in this case. The money will be used by the Bristol group to pay for 79 mini-projects to fill in gaps in the 10,000 mile National Cycle Network in locations from Blyth to Bath. With matching local funds, the cash could be worth double the amount allocated and prove a real benefit to walkers as well as cyclists across the whole UK. There is, however, an alternative explanation that, rather than making a considered choice, at least some of the voters were responding geographically. The Sustrans project appears to be the only one that would give funding to a wide range of locations whereas the three final competitors might well largely appeal to voters around Cornwall, Birmingham and Nottingham. It would be interesting to analyse where the vote for the unsuccessful projects was located before assuming that a public vote is any better at choosing the most effective way of spending money than a panel of 'experts'.

No comments:

Birder's Bonus 241

Noted a Curlew ( Numenius arquata ) on the Loughor estuary at Bynea.